and its Economic Management. 181 
were given some years ago by a writer in Gleanings, a 
prominent American bee journal. After stating that he 
preferred the Quinby frame, which is even larger than my 
Commercial, while at the same time he had also the 
smaller Langstroth frame in use, he says: “But as we 
found again and again, that the smallest crops came from 
the smallest hives, on the average, and that whenever the 
crop was short, 27 out of every 30 small hives had to 
be fed, while the large colonies had generally enough, we 
transferred all the bees out of these Langstroth hives. 
For 20 years our large hives have given us better 
results than our small ones. . . . I have the Budletin 
a’ Aptculture for October, 1894, and I find in it twelve 
selections from letters coming from Switzerland, Belgium, 
France and Spain, praising the large hives and the 
“ Dadant ” hives, showing 4y comparison that they are 
more profitable than smaller hives.” 
The late Captain Hetherington, another extensive 
American bee-keeper, working nearly 1,000 colonies at 
a time, was also assured that nothing but a large frame 
would give him a certain income year after year, and 
the position he attained among honey producers is 
undoubtedly one of the most convincing arguments I 
can bring forward. 
For Comb Honey. 
The Commercial Hive as a single stock, is used with 
eight frames* and two dummies, 14-inch thick, either 
packed or used as dry feeders; the object being to keep’ 
as zarrow a brood nest or cluster as possible, in opposition 
to the usual plan of adopting a wide supering surface 
above a shallow chamber. The latter does not give 
* The stock should at least be worked up to the full complement 
of eleven frames, reducing to eight when supering. 
